I drive an 18 wheeler, and at times on one of the Los Angeles freeways, it would be immoral/dangerous to drive 55 which is the posted limit. I often find I'm traveling 65 or a little more, in order to "feel" the safest, for others and myself. And believe me the police don't interfere.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Moral Law vs Civil Law
- Thread starter Heavenly Pilgrim
- Start date
Heavenly Pilgrim
New Member
Hillclimber: I drive an 18 wheeler, and at times on one of the Los Angeles freeways, it would be immoral/dangerous to drive 55 which is the posted limit. I often find I'm traveling 65 or a little more, in order to "feel" the safest, for others and myself. And believe me the police don't interfere.
HP: Excellent example. The attribute of moral law vs. civil law that I can see in force here is that civil law can and does change. For instance, when I grew up it was completely legal to drive 70mph, until the 55 mph came into effect. Trust me, in the lonely stretches across the plains, 55 was ludicrous considering the good highways, lack of traffic and great long distance visibility.
Moral law remains the same. It is part and parcel to the very nature and character of God. Moral law requires the same out of every being in the same state and relations. Simply put, moral law is immutable. Civil law is in constant flux.
HP: Excellent example. The attribute of moral law vs. civil law that I can see in force here is that civil law can and does change. For instance, when I grew up it was completely legal to drive 70mph, until the 55 mph came into effect. Trust me, in the lonely stretches across the plains, 55 was ludicrous considering the good highways, lack of traffic and great long distance visibility.
Moral law remains the same. It is part and parcel to the very nature and character of God. Moral law requires the same out of every being in the same state and relations. Simply put, moral law is immutable. Civil law is in constant flux.
Heavenly Pilgrim said:
Just like yours.
tragic_pizza
New Member
In fact, I would say that civil disobedience is at times mandatory in order to adhere to moral law.
Heavenly Pilgrim
New Member
HP: I can certainly think of scenarios in which that might be the case. Again, selfish intent as opposed to benevolence is at the heart of moral disobedience.
Brother Bob
New Member
Seems to me that some think the Civil Law is the Law of God and the Commandments are just some "outdated" material.
Brother Bob
New Member
I read it Bob.
Civil Law is supposed to be based upon the last 6 of the Ten Commandments, the commandments that have to do with how to love our neighbor.
The first 4 commandments, having to do with how we worship God, the Government has no right to interfere with. That is a matter between you and God, your own conscience.
Claudia
The first 4 commandments, having to do with how we worship God, the Government has no right to interfere with. That is a matter between you and God, your own conscience.
Claudia
Well said according to today's mores.hillclimber1 said:
What you really mean is this:
It's ok to break the law because every one else is doing it.
If everyone else is committing adultery that makes is right also.
If every student cheats on their exams that is the moral thing to do.
If every driver speeds that is the moral thing to do.
Break the law if every one else breaks the law. That is what our siciety has come to. Abortion is right because "everyone does it." That is the way our young people think today. And you wonder why! Who is setting the example??
DHK said:
OK, would you have me drive 55MPH, when so doing would increase, by a lot, the probability of an accident?
And the accusational/or maybe confrontational tone of the rest of your diatribe, angers me.
Peace be on you, as I respect your opinion on most issues a great deal.
I am not trying to be deliberately confrontational, but just pointing out the facts.hillclimber1 said:
How can I conscientiously stand in front of the pulpit and preach to my congregation avoid sin, to keep the law, if I am a hypocrite that deliberately breaks the law? My children, who tralvel with me all the time will see right through that. It it is ok for father to sin and go against his own convictions, then his convictions don't mean much. I believe many pastors have had children go astray for precisely those reasons--hypocrisy in the home--preaching one standard and living another.
The basic religious foundation of every educational institution in America is humanism. Our children are bombarded with it on a daily basis. Humanism teaches that there are no absolutes. Are we going to teach that very principle and reinforce it by our own actions. The Ten Commandments are absolutes. There are many absolutes in the Bible. We beleive in absolutes. But the only absolute in humansism is "there are no absolutes." It is a philosophy of relativism which leads to anarchy. We don't have the right to set our own laws. Laws were not made to be broken (contrary to some people's thinking).
When I keep the speed limit, and see vehicles zoom past me, I often see those same vehicles pulled over and fined or ticketed for their crime. I don't have any speeding tickets. I may have to drive in the right lane of the highway, but that doesn't bother me. What does bother me is large trucks who refuse to keep the speed limit and are passing most of the vehicles on the hiway in the left lane of the hiway. Usually the sign says: "Trucks use right lane."
Statistics (in our province) say that speeding is the #1 cause of road accidents. Should we also be a contributing factor to that statisitic by breaking the law? One can rationalize all they want by thinking they are driving more safely by speeding, but I don't buy it. Just because everyone else is doing it doesn't make it right.
Heavenly Pilgrim said:
How would that be so, considering scriptural commands for slaves to obey their earthly masters? Obviously runaway slaves were not doing that and those hiding them or helping them escape were abetting a violation of scriptural command. The slave owners, of course, came enormously short of accepting their slaves as even human, much less as brothers, as in the case of Philemon and Onesimus.
Or is abetting a violation not itself a violation? That is the reason I stopped giving loans to a bunch of guys I worked with 20+ years ago in this wood shop; I had ample evidence they were buying joints with it; even seen them smoke them on the premises. So I 'turned away from those who wanted to borrow,' even though Jesus clearly said to not do that, in order to avoid abetting a violation of civil [illegal drug] and moral [intoxication] law.
In both examples above, there are principles to 'weigh,' and we have none but our own reason for the solutions.
Heavenly Pilgrim
New Member
HP: I would just add that there is not proof that I have seen that in the cases you mention their owners did not treat them anything but fair and I have seen no indication that they would not accept a slave as a human or brother in the Lord. It would appear to me (as I recall reading about this case) that in the case of Onesimus that he might of in fact did his owner wrong, and was not converted until after he left his owner. Paul came to his aide as a witness of his changed heart, again as I recall without studying those passages very carefully again.
HP: I would add that we should base our reasons and decisions upon all of the principles that we in good conscience before God feel apply.
Heavenly Pilgrim
New Member
HP: DHK, I admire your dedication to uphold the letter of the law concerning the speed limits. We could all do well by following your excellent example.....at least in most cases.
If you were privy to the knowledge others might have in certain areas, you might see things slightly different, although it may not change your good habits in the least.
There is a state very near me that recently wanted to raise the speed limit on the Interstate to 80MPH. They decided against it due to the fact that if that was to happen people would feel it OK to drive 90. They formed a compromise, by keeping the limit at 70 but silently agreed not to generally issue tickets for anything less than 80 except in unusual circumstances.
Law without penalty is good advice or council, but is no law at all. If they allow you, without penalty under normal conditions, to travel 80mph, what has anyone violated? Certainly not the wishes or unwritten laws of the state and those that enforce the laws that I can see.
I am NOT advocating breaking any posted speed limits. Let everyman be assured in his own mind the moral and right thing to do, and be ready to cheerfully pay if ones judgment or information is found to be in error.:tear:
I always wonder about statistics such as you gave. I wonder of those speeding involved in accidents, how many had drugs of some kind or another involved?
If you were privy to the knowledge others might have in certain areas, you might see things slightly different, although it may not change your good habits in the least. There is a state very near me that recently wanted to raise the speed limit on the Interstate to 80MPH. They decided against it due to the fact that if that was to happen people would feel it OK to drive 90. They formed a compromise, by keeping the limit at 70 but silently agreed not to generally issue tickets for anything less than 80 except in unusual circumstances.
Law without penalty is good advice or council, but is no law at all. If they allow you, without penalty under normal conditions, to travel 80mph, what has anyone violated? Certainly not the wishes or unwritten laws of the state and those that enforce the laws that I can see.
I am NOT advocating breaking any posted speed limits. Let everyman be assured in his own mind the moral and right thing to do, and be ready to cheerfully pay if ones judgment or information is found to be in error.:tear:
I always wonder about statistics such as you gave. I wonder of those speeding involved in accidents, how many had drugs of some kind or another involved?
tragic_pizza
New Member
Is there not a danger in being too conscious of following the letter of the law -- moral or civil?
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
tragic_pizza said:
The Bible never complains "they have followed My Word TOO WELL! They need to back off a bit and mix in more rebellion" -- agreed?
What we DO find is that OBEDIENCE is not a substitute for FAITH nor a means of salvation EVEN when it is obedience to "Love your Neighbor" Lev 19:18.
And that point keeps getting made time after time in the NT and OT.
In Christ,
Bob